Each of the four Gospels presents Jesus Christ from a different point of emphasis. Matthew, being a Levite, emphasizes Jesus as the Messiah, the Lion of the Tribe of Judah. Each of the subtleties of his design supports this primary theme. His genealogy begins with the "first Jew," Abraham, and continues through David and the royal line to the legal father of Jesus, Joseph. As a customs official, Matthew was skilled in shorthand, and focuses on what Jesus said, and includes the extensive discourses, which he probably was able to take down verbatim. Matthew's first miracle is the cleansing of a leper, a Jewish metaphor for sin itself. Matthew concludes with the resurrection, also a distinctive Jewish preoccupation. Luke was a Gentile and a doctor, and his Gospel reflects a very distinctive point of view, emphasizing Jesus as the Son of Man. His genealogy begins with Adam, the first man. From Abraham to David, his list is identical to that of Matthew. However, when he gets to David, he doesn't track through Solomon (the first surviving son of Bathsheba) but through a different son, Nathan (the second surviving son of Bathsheba). He continues through to Heli, the father of Mary. (Joseph is the son-in-law of Heli). As a Gentile, Luke's emphasis is different. His emphasis is Christ's humanity; he focuses on what Jesus felt. His first miracle is the expulsion of a demon, a very human concern. Luke concludes with the promise of the giving of the Holy Spirit, which is a natural bridge to his subsequent volume, The Book of Acts . Mark is the amanuensis (secretary) for Peter, and he emphasizes Jesus as the obedient Servant of YHWH. His is the only Gospel with no concern for pedigree or genealogy. He focuses on what Jesus did ; it deals in graphic images, almost like a movie or video shooting script. Mark concludes with the final visual appearance, the Ascension. John had a very distinctive view, emphasizing Jesus as the Son of God. He focuses on who Jesus was . His "genealogy" is that of the Preexistent One, constituting his opening verses. His Gospel is organized around seven miracles, seven discourses, and seven "I AM" statements John's first miracle involves the use of the water of purification being changed to wine at Cana, a private demonstration to the disciples that Jesus was preeminent even over the Levitical priesthood. John concludes with the promise of Jesus' return, and becomes the appropriate prequel to John's final tome, The Revelation . It is interesting that each time we encounter the "super-angels" (variously called cherubim or seraphim ) that surround the Throne of God, we note that there are four "faces" involved: a lion, an ox, a man, and an eagle. It is interesting that each of these "faces" are suggestive of each of the four Gospels: Matthew, presenting the Lion of the Judah; Mark, the ox (the classic emblem of servanthood); Luke, the Son of Man; and John, the Son of God in the heavens. The Bible is an amazing treasure hunt.
@@Dora-hi2nwI do not know of any such proofs and how do they know they were written centuries after while even Roman history tracks down to the times of the apostles?
Another great video Religiosity Plus! Always look forward to what you will release next. Very well presented and easy to watch and listen to. Keep up the great productions!
Great video! I think the only think it’s missing is the idea that Matthew wrote Jesus’s genealogy through Joseph, while Luke wrote the genealogy through Mary. From what I have studied, in Hebrew culture they memorize names of their father and their fathers that come before. I love the fact that was added about the 141414. I didn’t know that! However, I believe Luke went against the cultural approach and followed Mary’s genealogy since she is the only parent to actually share blood ties with Jesus. When looking at the genealogy from both books they are the same (outside of where they start) until they reach Dawit. After Dawit Matthew says Solomon, while in Luke it says Nathan. I don’t think it was a mistake, I believe it was done on purpose to prove Jesus was the promised one from both Mary and Joseph. Satisfying the cultural traditions and their true blood ties with Mary and God seen in Luke!
Mary's genealogy would have taken him to the tribe of Levi not Judah. She was not related to King David. Mary being from the tribe of Levi allowed Jesus to become a Rabbi. If you think Jesus wasn't a Rabbi, then you didn't read the Bible.
@@erichwentz2866 interesting can you show me the verse that state she came from the tribe of Levi? Because if she didn’t come from David Gods promise would technically not be true since Jesus has 0 relations with Joseph. At the end of the day Rabbi just means teacher.
@@jonathanhabtegiorgis6010 two things for you.... 1) bloodline is blood adoption doesn't cover that. 2) by saying Rabbi is another name for teacher, tells me you know very little about the subject. A Rabbi would never call another man a Rabbi, unless he was an actual Rabbi. The mother of a Rabbi absolutely must come from the tribe of Levi. This would not be up for a debate in their time. Jesus was a Rabbi and had his own ministry. The Messiah comes from both Levi (Rabbi) and Judah (King). I have opened the door, it is for you to seek and find. May God bless you in your discovery.
The Gospel of Luke is to be taken with a grain of salt 🧂. His book is 2nd, 3rd and 4th accounts of Jesus's life. He never met him or even heard him speak. Everything Luke wrote was technically heresay. Also, I must point out that in the Hebrew version Isaiah wrote a young woman would give birth. In the Greek version it says a virgin will give birth. Funny how the European Catholic Church uses the Greek version instead of the Hebrew (original) version. Bottom line... my God Yahweh doesn't impregnate virgins, that's the Greco-Roman Zeus who does that.
Mary and Joseph were quite poor. We know this because they brought two turtle doves instead of a lamb to his presentation in the temple (what you called the purification, in this video). I doubt they owned a camel. I’ve always thought they made the trip from Nazareth to Bethlehem with Joseph walking and Mary riding a donkey. Also, I’ve heard that Mary likely walked to visit Elizabeth who was pregnant with John the Baptist. It’s about 85 miles and probably took her over a week each way. Mama Mary definitely was one tough lady!
Joseph wasn't poor, he is a direct descendent of King David and probably lived on royal land. Also, everyone knew and respected Joseph in Nazareth. He also owned and operated his own business. Poor he wasn't, they also could afford to pay for Jesus schooling at the synagogue for 18 years.
Thank you Whitley for the comment! I think I like Matthew's version best just because I think he is a bit more creative in the way he tells the story. Luke's version seems a little more straightforward and to the point. 😊
@@RyanJones-ew8vm Virtually all secular scholars agree Jesus was a real person, lived in Galilee, crucified by Pilate and worshiped by the 1st century church as the risen Savior.
Thank you No Edge to A Dream! I recently got a new job, so I've been settling in there these past few months. But I hope to make videos much more frequently in 2023! Much love!
As someone who studies history it’s maddening at times when you have people at the same scene describe things very differently from each other. Sometimes contradicting the other.
Luke is Mary’s and Mathew’s is Joseph. The last part says son of not begat. Mary was from David’s line in blood. Joseph was the heir and king and he adopted Jesus as son. So Jesus had the adopted right as Joseph’s son and the blood of David from Mary. Like everything in the Bible, it is perfect.
@@lostfan5054 yes it is fella. Do you think that no one has confronted this in the history of Christianity? That there is just this huge glairing difference that everyone just overlooks? The only people who do not accept the 2 separate genealogies are those who have a want to discredit the Bible. Every major and minor Christian denomination that I know accepts this understanding of the genealogies. The best explanation I could find in a quick search comes from Doug Bookman in an article called "The Genealogies of Jesus." In my experience people who try to make something out of this section of the Bible have a bias and cling to what they can and refuse to accept any explanation. Either way, acceptance or not, have a great holiday and God bless.
@@dylankahler981 you really think that when presented with a contradicton, believers would just stop believing? Faith is not based on reason, so when presented with good reason to stop believing, they still won't. There are contradictions, regardless of the terrible explanations believers have thought up in the past centuries. Both genealogies are Joseph's, regardless of how much you want to delude yourself into believing that the bible says something it just doesn't.
@@lostfan5054 if Mary and Joseph followed the Judean tradition of being betrothed patrilineal first cousins in an arranged marriage, then yes, there is going to be overlaps in family genealogy until you get to that last few generations. Heck, husbands and wives today could be 15th or 16th cousins with their common ancestor being a Lord from the Elizabethan court or something wild like that.
@@angelahull9064 this is a good point, and I suspect Joseph and Mary were probably cousins or something. That was very common back then. My greater point is that the Bible doesn't say this. It says Joseph was a descendant of David. So unless you believe Jesus was the son of Joseph, the bible doesn't say Jesus was descended from David. That's your own inference based off extra-biblical stuff like Judean tradition
Another thing you didn't mention is the fact that Yeshua's (Jesus) birthday is never given .The fact is if you study the date dec.25, you will find that most pagun gods are said to be born on this day. Question: Why did they give him a pagun birthday date .?
IF YOU CAN PROVE THAT ,PROVE IT.Oh, and the bible does say the shepherds were in the field at night with their sheep.Which would never happen it's to cold in Dec.and there is nothing for the sheep to eat.His birthday is not given in the bible It's the paguns that gave him dec.25 ...which is not biblical. try again dumb dumb .
@@danaleanne38the fact you won’t have a single ancient calendar with the day dec 25th being attributed to any deity before Christianity became widespread in Rome when Constantine turned to Christianity the early 300s, with most the calendars found with dec 25th being attributed to any pagan deity coming in the mid/late 300s. When we combine that with the fact that the calendars which predate this have pagan sun god worship in what we consider early fall, it’s very clear that the pagan worship holiday was moved AFTER Christians adopted December 25th as Christ’s birthday. And that date was chosen due to Christian tradition that the day Christ died would also be the day of his annunciation (his conception) and this 9 months later would be December 25th. So now we have the evidence to see when pagan worship was moved and how December 25th was actually chosen. So no, Jesus’ birthday wasn’t just picked to follow in the steps of pagan sun god worship. This is just another argument people bring up when they don’t understand any of the history behind Christmas and believe it’s a way to have a “gotcha” moment.
After watching a bunch of your videos, I must say... you have the absolute best collection of music T-shirts I've ever seen! Excellent content. Your channel is sure to grow.
The Mother of God is Ever-Virgin. The Bible says Joseph did not know her until Jesus was born. That's true But in ancient Greek "until" doesn't work the same way it typically does in English. When Christ says "I will be with you,even until the end of the age" does that mean Jesus is leaving when the age is over? No.
From my understanding the book of Matthew was the only gospel that was written in Hebrew, compared to the language the other gospels were written in Greek. If this is possibly true, then wouldn't the interpretation between the two languages read differently anyway? I'm just curious, your intake in this video was quite interesting. The book of Matthew is one of my favorite books of the gospels to read, the other is John. Blessings to you!!!
There is no evidence that Matthew was written in Hebrew. There are no manuscripts or copies of Matthew’s gospel in Hebrew. When it was referenced by the early church fathers, they used Matthew’s Greek gospel.
Matthew was originally written in Aramaic. That's the later dialect. Sort of how Hebrew language changed over time and was the version of the language which was used during the period. The Aramaic was found in the caves of the dead sea scrolls.
At the beginning of his gospel, Luke made it clear that he's not an eye witness and that his work was a result of "careful investigation". Sometimes the truth depends on the source of information one happens to land on. But the important thing in my opinion, is whether Jesus is the Messiah and his birth was indeed in fulfillment of the scripture.
The problem is that “the fulfillment of the scriptures” is a total fabrication. One gospel writer looked at the old testament “prophecy” “from Egypt I called my son” and invented a nice little story about Jesus fleeing to Egypt in the middle of the night. Even a child knows that it’s all made up. Supernatural stories from primitive, superstitious people! Time to grow up!
Take the time to actually count the names listed in the third group of 14 in Mathew. If the Joseph listed there is Jesus' father as stated in this video, then there are only 13 generations from David to Jesus. The word translated "husband" can also be translated "father". As Mary is Jesus' human parent, it is through her that the throne of David must come, and not her husband. Luke, however, shows the genealogy of Joseph, Mary's husband which is important not for Jesus's immediate claim to the throne of David, but for the legal requirement for him to be established as being from the House of David also. The Book of Numbers (Ch 27) lays out the way a woman may inherit, and for Mary to retain the claim of a direct descendant of David, she would have to marry someone who was also of the House of David, hence the establishing that Joseph her husband was also of the House of David. Most of the events recorded in Luke occur shortly after His birth, and the events recorded in Mathew (the arrival of the Magi, for example) occur when Jesus is about a year and a half old. The two gospels are not of the same identical events: Mathew shows Him as a King with a legal claim to His ancestors' throne, and Luke shows Him as a Man among men. In reading the Bible, and the Gospels in particular, do not confuse identical events with similar ones. Too often the casual reader wants to make them the same, but this will give rise to supposed errors and conflicts when there are none.
Good explanation! Much more details of the story can be found in Maria Valtorta's Poem of Man-God, which were revealed by Our Lord for us living today so that we may not stray from the True Faith in this time of tribulations and coming Antichrist who will deny everything about Our Lord. By the way, from the Poem of Man-God, we know that Our Lord was about 10 month old when the Magi came and worshipped Him, before they fled to Egypt, for His 1st birthday occurred at Matarea, near Cairo (Vol. 1, p.723).
Matthew 13:15 “For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.”
Another similarity is that Herod the Great is mentioned in both Gospels (though his massacre of the innocents is not mentioned in St. Luke). Chapter 1, verse 5.
What it comes down to is what a pastor once told me. "The Bible is like the manger. They both hold Jesus, but, being man-made, there's a few bent nails here and there."
There is so much you miss and look over. Because one says something and the other omits doesn’t mean anything. The genealogy is not wrong. The magi came later. The Shepard’s were day more during the actual census. It’s all there you just have to actually do you research.
@@alyssabeale1095Why answer someone who simply asserts nonsense, without even a semblance of coherence, let alone any evidence. The plain language fo these two accounts is utterly contradictory; harmonizing them through bizarre and baseless claims is simply childish bullshit.
Luke says that everyone had to go to their hometown (or "their own city" depending on the translation) for the registration (or "census" or "taxation" or "enrolment" depending on the translation) and then stops to explain why Bethlehem is Joseph's hometown. In other words, Luke uses time and papyrus space to explain that Mary is from Nazareth in Galilee while Joseph is from Bethlehem in Judea. Because of this, some Scholars also consider that the "inn" translation is a mistake and it actually means an "upper room" in the home of Joseph's relatives or parents. And if someone wonders why Joseph and Mary were getting married if they were once from different cities and different regions, then in ancient times it was no more strange than if today you marry someone who lives in a different city and region (however, the difference is of course that today marriages are arranged less frequently). And if anyone is wondering what Joseph was doing in Nazareth, the local wedding custom of that time was that the groom arrived at the bride's home to pick up the bride for the wedding.
The census though historically speaking would not have called for you to report to the land of your ancestors but the land you would actually live in so can anyone clarify why they returned to the home of the ancestors when this has been disproven
There are things that we as westerners dont fully understand looking at things at face value but look into “levirate marriage.” If a man died without having any sons, it was tradition for the man’s brother to marry the widow and have a son who would carry on the deceased man’s name. This way Jesus can be both from the line of Mary and the line of Joseph and fulfill prophecy. A lot of this stuff has already been thought over for centuries , even just a few google searches shows that many things in this video are just misinterpretations or not fully understanding bronze age ancient Israelite genealogy customs , which i dont blame you for not knowing it
Just a thought/theory?: Could these two Gospels (Matthew & Luke around Jesus' birth) be an answer/a reflection of the two different Genisis? 🤔 I dunno 😅
Story one: Tyler went to Burger King to buy his sister a whopper because she was bothering him about it. He then stopped by Walmart to buy himself a book. When he returned, his sister was angry because the food was cold so he fled from her room. Story two: Tyler left one day from his house and stopped at Burger King, Walmart, and Starbucks. When he returned, he showed his sister all the things he purchased but swiftly left the room, leaving with nothing but the scratches his sister gifted him back. Note: All of these things happened, they are both accurate accounts. They do not contradict, one simply leaves out information and one adds information. Moral of the story: Don’t keep your sister waiting when she’s hungry.
That's not at all what's happening here. It's more like, story two: Tyler left one day from his house and stopped at burger king, walmart and Starbucks. On his way back, his car was hit by another driver and he had to be taken to the hospital. Tyler was diagnosed with a cracked rib cage and a broken femur, and spent several weeks in the hospital recovering. On the day he was discharged his sister picked him up and he suggested they stop by Burger King to get the burger she had asked for the night of the accident. She became annoyed at him, as if her cravings mattered at all in the moment. In truth her anger was rooted in guilt, for had she not requested Burger King her brother wouldn't have been in an accident. Can you reconcile those accounts? Only if you're emotionally invested in the two accounts being reconciled and your entire world view depends on it. Then you desperately reach for ridiculous explanations as to how these accounts are really just different accounts of the same events.
@@omarmunoz5787 wow umm, thanks for the read. And while I’m not of the same though, I still appreciate you reading through what I had to say and sharing your own thoughts.
@@omarmunoz5787i think that happens to everyone in every worldview. Just look as secular scientists scramble to reconcile evidence like soft tissue in fossils or presnce of carbon 14 at all or fossilization that implies flash flood more than gradual build up. I think it depends on which worldview is more consistent and less arbitrary and more foundational for the presuppositions of intelligibility
What I love about his birth celebration: Shepherds were visited in the field about a Savior born laying in a manger, a Light of the World. A host of Angels appeared singing. You talk about a grand entrance! Nobody does it better. Kings/wisemen of the East saw a star that heralded a birth of a King, King of the Jews. (Remember on the Cross Pilot the Governor had it written King of the Jews). He was born where animals were kept.... Laying in a manger. Shepherds were told about it and how significant is that, Shepherds whose sole job is taking care of sheep and lambs, were privileged to told about the best lamb...the Lamb of God.
Extremally interesting, but where does the donkey come from or the stable and what are the clues that point to a date of birth? I wish the video was longer.
I mean, if they are both right (cause you won't claim one of them is wrong and one is right) and they don't contradict each other, then how is it possible these stories are so different? I mean, is there really a way both stories are actually correct? Cause it seems a lot of things don't add up
There are a few biblical scholars who can help - Jacob Prasch, Vodie Baucham, or Chuck Missler. Once explained it seems obvious. You might also like the perspective of a cold case homicide detective, J Warner Wallace, whose book, Person of Interest, helps you understand why different witnesses can have different narratives yet still be accurate.
It is very much known in the cognitive sciences that eye witnesses of the same event may report very different things (researchers are still studying the differences in eye witness reports of the 9/11 attacks; even though it was thoroughly documented in multiple forms of media, people still get some details wrong), but the overlaps are still consistent. It would be a more problematic contradiction if one Gospel reported the birth in Bethlehem and another reported it in another town, like Nazareth. But both narratives are consistent with Bethlehem. Whether it was in a manger or a cave is a trivial detail to get wrong. And let us not make the mistake of thinking these narratives have events following in close succession of one another. The Holy Family likely stayed in Bethlehem for some time before the visitation of the Magi and the fleeing into Egypt.
@@angelahull9064 I guess I need to sit down and map out these things, but I should remind you none of the writers of the gospels were eye witnesses of Jesus' birth
Matthew's lineage goes from Abiud--Mary's line. Luke's goes from Rhesa--Joesph's line. Matthew--27 generations of 40 years...from Solomon. Patriarchal--father's line. Luke--40 generations of 25 years...from Nathan. Matriarchal---mother's line. Both werw sons of Zerubbabel. Mary & Joseph also were related. Joseph was Mary's great-aunt Gadat's son. The birth story in Matthew is Jesus' actual birth into the world. Luke's story takes place 12 years later, in 6 AD. Luke is not making one of his alleged errors. It is about Jesus' 2d birth into the community. When the David was crowned, he was 'born' as the adopted 'Son of God', according to the words of the liturgy of coronation found in the 2d Psalm. When Mary 'brought him forth' she was following the symbolism in which the boy was separated from his mother. When he was 'wrapped in cloths,' he was being clothed in the ceremonial veatment. This is the year when the census was taken. Quirinius ordered the census, & he was never governor of Syria when Herod was alive. The census was a time when people had to register their property, & they weren't required to travel all over the country to do it. Jesus was born on Sunday March 1, 7BC in Bethlehem of Judea, a residential complex a kilometer south of Qumran. It was originally a palace for Hasmonean royalty, it was called the Queen's house. Also, because animals were stabled there, it was called the 'Manger'. When Joeph was told to 'flee into Egypt', it was not the literal Egypt. When the Egyptian Therapeuts were in Qumran, it was called 'Egypt', & Joseph with them was called 'Joseph in Egypt'. This was a suitable place to hide. The caves were already used as places for solitary meditation, & there were so many in the limestone cliffs that it was possible to stay undetected for a long time. The 'Gabriel' that told Joseph to takeMary as his wife was Simeon the Abiathar Priest. Basically, he told Joseph to treat the 1st marriage as if it were the 2d one, the binding one, because Jesus was conceived before the 1st marriage, which began the trial period. The part in the story about there being 'no room in the inn' means that Mary & Joseph were in the married state, & were not allowed into the KATALYMA, the upper room, the sacred dining chamber. They were not allowed into the highest form of communion, reserved for separated celibates. The meaning of the 'shepherds in the field' scenario is this: Down at Ain Feshkha, the 'farm', the pastors or 'shepherds' were meeting for the equinox The 'angel of the Lord' Simeon-Gabriel came to them & announced the new regime & and that the 12 year old Jesus would continue the succession. The ministers sang a hymn of praise, & declared the new policy: "Peace on earth". I hope this has been helpful in understanding the true events surrounding Jesus' birth, & also dispelling all of the supernatural elements.
Luke delves into the All Inclusiveness of Jesus- the Savior of ALL Humanity. Matthew focuses on relevant figures in Jewish history. Luke focuses on Jesus being the Son of Man- Human. Matthew focuses on Jesus' Divinity. Matthew focuses on the Law. Luke focuses on Grace.
No. Matthew and Luke used Mark as their template. The genealogy in Matthew runs through the direct lineage of Joseph where Luke follows the lineage of Mary both of whom were descendants of David.
So you're saying that the author of Luke was using Hebrew gematria? But the gospels were written in Greek not Hebrew. Greek has its own gematria system
How do you get that Hosea 11:1 is God calling Jesus out of Egypt? Reading the whole chapter it’s clearly about the children of Israel. Seems like Matthew ripped that out of context.
But the biggest mistake in the Bible is that Jesus' family was traced through Joseph, and Joseph is only Jesus' step father and not related to Jesus in any way. A true family history would only be through Mary. But women were only seen as property in the Bible, so this would have been unheard of.
Jews were getting married with people from the same tribe so Mary is also from David. Apart from that from the Law‘s perspective, the legal rights shall we say, these come from the father, in this case of course the apparent father.
@@konstantinoszeimpekis9874 1 Timothy 2:12, ” I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.” Deuteronomy 22:28-29 28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
Thanks for the video. Your claims that the two accounts are very different are somewhat true; however, the differences don't pose contradictions. When the two accounts are placed together, they complement each other. When one mentions a fact that the other does not mention, we see complementation, not contradiction. The only part that appears to be contradictory is the genealogy; however, it was not uncommon for Jewish writers to substitute grandfathers for fathers in the records. Also, it is possible that Luke was tracing the genealogy through Mary, who was related to Joseph and shared many of the same relatives as her husband.
Is the biggest contradiction between these two not just the simple difference in time? (Matthew) - If they ALL went back to Israel after King Herod died (4BC), (Luke) - how could Mary be pregnant and going to Bethlehem due to the census of Quirinius (6AD)? I'm open to hearing any explanations and potentially changing my mind so please feel free to comment haha
Is it True that in The Holy Bible Why the Gyneology of Jesus Christ is Different in Mathew 1-1 and Luke 3-23.. In Mathew 1-1 The Father of Joseph the Carpenter is Jacob And in Luke 3-23 The Father of Joseph the Carpenter is Heli..??🙏🙏🙏
Absolutely fantastic video! I love your neutrality, and how you present the knowledge. To my understanding, the wise men approached Jesus when he was a 2-year-old. If i remember correctly the Greek used is child, and not that of a newborn unlike Lukes which using Greek to describe newborn. Perhaps Mary and Joseph returned to Nazareth but faced slander from the locals and returned back to Bethlehem to get away from it. After the fleet to Egypt, and hearing that Herrods pass over slaughtering son took charge in Judah they returned to Nazareth as a last resort.
But there are contradictions, many actually.This is a great video and topic. The majority of Christians know the story of Jesus as an amalgamation of the gospels. Each author tells a widely varying tale and the variations are often in very important aspects of the gospel. One would imagine the inerrant word of an omniscient god would tell a decisive narrative that leaves no room for variation or interpretation for that matter. When speaking on the historicity of the Jesus story these facts can't be overlooked and distorted by apologists.
More of an inaccuracy. Not because two people differ in their story on one person, doesn’t mean that person does not exist or the story about him are all false. And oh, Luke was not even an Apostle of Jesus. He just heard it from another Apostle. And yes, the Gospels were written by human and there bound to be inconsistencies. Don’t you know how word of mouth works? And yes, these Gospels were written decades apart. It is not like they were sitting in one room writing their own version of the story.
maybe just maybe they are all different narrations of the same whole story. all i see here are two narrations that probably compliment each other if we really dig deep... a lot of the time you did mention that one book didnt mention certain things but at the same time did not contradict. therefore all i see here is the same story but of different scenes
Did Joseph have any children before he knew Blessed Mother Mary , he was much older than Her, I was very curious about this😊✝️🇺🇸🎄 Merry Christmas Happy New Year and God bless all of us in the world we call home together ⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄
EXACTLY. But also note that Joseph is a descendant of David (King), and Mary (cousin of Elizabeth) is ALSO a descendant of Aaron (Priest). Jesus was both King and Priest. And this is WHY each author chose to tell the story from those perspectives and chose to include only events that highlighted those views. I wonder how many other events were not included - John 21:25 tells us exactly this.
Really good point. It’s quite possible that Luke could have had access to Mary herself when writing his Gospel account, or at least he could have had access to the Apostle John, her adopted son.
2:35, mathews geneology is via Joseph, luke's geneology is Via Mary, the number 14 is not important, because in both geneology, he is being mentioned as son of David.
I really do believe that these 2 gospels have very little differences between them, and I do hope & pray 🙏 that if I am incorrect, that ALMIGHTY GOD will forgive me ❤😢😢😢😢😊
I think that you missed something very important about the two genealogy in both books. In Luke account you have all men, but in Matthew you have Rahab and Ruth in it. This maybe the way Matthew is saying this is Mary genealogy and not Joseph. And the way Luke end his genealogy is say that Joseph was not the physical father of Jesus.
It’s weird to me that Christians never want to consider that authors could be mistaken. We are all taught that the idea that there’s divine something something that means what they wrote was true. But we know that when God speaks to us it isn’t like an intercom system. Also, some things in the Bible that aren’t directly from God or Jesus, could be the result of the Apostles’ own ideas and not God. An example of that might be Ephesians where Paul says women should submit to their husbands. Is that too much thinking? Or does it seem like a lack of faith? Call me crazy, but the only things I find definite are God and Jesus. And even then we should always consider translation and author errors.
Mary's travels visiting relatives are not so bad. My mom and dad took us kids on road-trip vacations, routinely involving eight or more hours ride per day for two days back to back, then a break day exploring local sites ... often including visits to relatives. I can appreciate Joseph and Mary not traveling in a Buick, but as I remember the Gospels they were more likely to travel by donkey than by camel. Mary was an awesome lady in many ways but I think we can attribute this performance to her being a typically motivated Jewish mother with strong family connections 😅 .
Why is Josephs's ancestry covered if he is not the father of Jesus? Never understood that one. For Jesus to be descended from David it should be through Mary.
Just because both story contradicts the other mean something is wrong. You may say this is an excuse but we have to keep in mind that they may only rely to memorization and different sources because of the oral tradition back in those times. It may not be as precise and accurate but the story is just trying to convey the birth of Christ whether they are similar or not. Just like the nonsensical debate between denominations that Jesus wasn’t born on December 25. Yes nothing is mentioned in the scriptures and holding to the plot of the story that it could be on September when shepherds watch their flocks by night, but just because we don’t know the exact date doesn’t necessarily meant we don’t have to pick the date. What matters is we celebrate his birthday, historically accurate or not. Are we even living in an honest life if we keep focusing on the accuracy on everything we believe. Do we have to check whats unseen in the juice of an orange fruit before we even eat it? Do we have to check the air we breathe if it’s clean? Even preachers and bible teachers have different interpretations on scriptures but do we have to be so keep which doctrine is correct? It’s all in our faith and one must remain focused on the message and purpose behind the scriptures rather than tearing them apart in search of contradictions. The Bible was not written as a modern history book but as a collection of divinely inspired accounts that reveal God’s plan for humanity. The beauty of the Gospels lies in their complementary perspectives, each offering unique insights into the life and mission of Jesus Christ. Whether or not the Nativity accounts perfectly align, they both point to the same truth: the miraculous birth of our Savior, who came to redeem us. It’s not about proving who’s right or wrong but about understanding the deeper message of God’s love and salvation. Instead of debating trivial details, why not focus on the transformative power of Jesus in our lives? Faith is not about having all the answers or proving every detail correct; it’s about trusting God even when we don’t fully understand. Let’s not let debates distract us from the bigger picture-Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection for our salvation. As Christians, our mission is not to win arguments but to lead others to Christ. Let’s celebrate His birth, His love, and His sacrifice with hearts full of gratitude and faith.
No, Luke did not use Matthew as a source. Matthew and Luke both used Mark and Q (lost to us). They each had their own unique sources: called by scholars M for Matthew and L for Luke. Unlikely that they were aware of each other's accounts. Btw, we don't actually know who the authors were nor where they were located. They both were Greek speakers, rather than Aramaic, the language of Jesus. They definitely are contradictory. Read them side by side. Also, it is unlikely Jesus went anywhere near Bethlehem.
A heck of a lot of traveling back and forth for people who probably didn’t go anywhere if you ask me. It is 90 miles from Galilee to Bethlehem each way.
Well, seeing as they documented words Jesus said when he was alone (Example: Garden of Gethsemane) I'd have to say no, the gospel writers were not there to witness Jesus' birth.
Nice story, but you forgot something. Because you're talking about the lineage of Joseph. And Joseph wasn't the father of Jesus! So Jesus didn't come from the lineage of David. So the bible is wrong anyway.
DON'T BE SO SILLY! If you have an x-ray, say of you knee they will take two views - AP and lateral - very different pictures, but of the same knee, just from different angles - that's all. And that's how it is with Matthew and Luke - THEY JUST TELL DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE SAME STORY - no one with any intelligence thinks anything different!
That's not correct, Mary came from the tribe of Levi. She was a temple virgin as her father was a Rabbi in the synagogue. Same with Elizabeth, Zachariah ( John the Baptist father ) was the Rabbi in his synagogue. Mary came from the house of Rabbi. Joseph came from the house of King. This is why Jesus had claims to both.
There was no Luke and Mathew, only some unknown writers wrote the bibles in accordance to Luke and Mathew respectively. Whether those writers consulted both of them did not matter since the writers, Luke, and Mathew were not known of their identities.
One problem...If the lineage is from David to Joseph to prove that the messiah is a direct descendant of King David, then it all falls apart as Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus...It would have had to be a line from David to Mary for this to be true...
I think the message is the same, Matthew spent time with Jesús and Mary,Luke, and the other hand was not a direct Apostle of Jesús, he spent more time with Paul. Maybe that’s why the message is a little different.
Matthew 26:36-44 (NIV) 36 Then Jesus went with his disciples to a place called Gethsemane, and he said to them, “Sit here while I go over there and pray.” 37 He took Peter and the two sons of Zebedee along with him, and he began to be sorrowful and troubled. 38 Then he said to them, “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death. Stay here and keep watch with me.” 39 Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.” 40 Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. “Couldn’t you men keep watch with me for one hour?” he asked Peter. 41 “Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.” 42 He went away a second time and prayed, “My Father, if it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be done.” 43 When he came back, he again found them sleeping, because their eyes were heavy. 44 So he left them and went away once more and prayed the third time, saying the same thing.
Didn't watch. If title is meant to be an accurate assessment of the bottom line--how many times do we have to go over this? Luke tells story of birth night. Matthew's tale took place up to two years later. Read the book, "Christmas Revisited" by Robert Simms. We've put so much myth into this story we hardly know what happened and what didn't.
So you decided to click on a video you knew you would not watch to voice your uninformed opinion based on a title you “assume” you would disagree with. Color me impressed!
@@ReligiosityPlus There's nothing uninformed about my opinion. In fact, it wasn't an opinion. It was a statement of fact. I also didn't assume what the content of the video was; I responded to the TITLE of the video, which should mean something. If it was a title that misled the surfer as to what the video was really about, then just ignore what I said. It's easy to do.
I responded to your comment because I found it kind of humorous. I still find it funny that you won’t watch, as if there is nothing you could possibly learn from it. Perhaps I present an argument you’ve not heard before? If that’s the case, you’ll never know because you judged a video by its title. Not the behavior of an open minded seeker of knowledge if you ask me.
Mary was full of faith. She also watched her firstborn brutally tourchered . She then watched her baby boy humiliate stripped naked, and then she watched her child die on the cross by crucifixion. Mary wasn't just tough. Mary was faithful, full of grace, blessed, and chosen by The Lord CREATOR OF THE HEAVEN AND EARTH.
You're discourse omits that Lukes genealogy covers Mary and Joseph covers David and the switch comes with Solomon with Joseph and Nathan with Mary.. Homework for you; check out Why the switch with Solomon/ Nathan. Best of His Grace. Bo Bowditch 😁
If 2 men see a car crash, and one mentions birds flying by before the crash and the other mentions hearing a man yell before the crash, are they contradicting each other? No, see you said joseph being the son of david. Every jew considers therefore fathers still to be there father no matter the time gap. So technically king david is everyone's father under him and on description is more accurate than the other, but neither contradict each other the information is being filled in. Because the car crash remained consistent and the details mentioned paint a clearer picture from eye witnesses. The gospel is the same, all speak on jesus on what he did and from those accounts we can tell what was most consistent which were miracles, his death and resurrection his message and his purpose for being there with some adding details the others miss or simply explaining as is from their perspective, the revelation of christ is sifting through all their findings to get the bigger picture of who he was.
There's a chapter in the Qur'an titled 'Mary' which explains the birth of Jesus Christ. Actually... Mary is the ONLY female to be mentioned in the Qur'an.
Well, that 14 thing is 😎. So, 14 x 3, makes perfect sense to me. My mom studied her family ancestry atleast back to early pilgrims. Hard to remember all the 'first borns' except for most part of couple centuries they all had basically the same name. She managed back only 11 gens. 😅 For us that was a lot.
"no contradictions"? Are you blind? Can you read? There are differences. Why in Matthew did he NOT mention a census? Why in Matthew did he not say of the so called journey to Bethlehem on a donkey for Mary? Luke has shepherds visit Jesus, but no mention of Kings from the east - Matthew mentions the kings, but no mention of shepherds. Matthew doesn't say Jesus was born in a stable in a manger. Luke does. There are contradictions.
@@johnking5174 you literally did not mention one single contradiction. Those were omittions. That happens throughout history. Do you think that everyone that witnessed the attack on September 11th would give the same account of what happened that day?? You are not using common sense. Sad.
@@LajontahsBackup Isn't it the "word of God"? - Shouldn't it be 100% correct? Why omit certain things, if they really happened? This is the get out of jail free card you religious use all the time.
@@johnking5174 it is not incorrect. Why are you behaving like a child? I literally just gave you the perfect example of how two accounts could contain completely different information but the main premise of the accounts are all similar and they would both be accurate.
I like to do videos on all kinds of religious and theological topics, but Christianity has so many different topics to explore. In the next month or two I plan to mix it up much more. Thanks for the comment Cameron Shaffer!
I am tired of this perspective trope. I was taught this as a kid and took it at face value. What exactly do we mean by perspective and whose perspective. Take for instance the birth story in this video, the story is basically around Joseph, Mary and the baby Jesus. Whose perspective is being told. It is unarguable that Luke and Matthew’s author were not present. They must have at least being told the story. If there is any truth in the story itself then the retelling will likely be done by Mary since Joseph seemingly disappears from the story. It is safe to say there’s only one perspective to be told, Mary’s. The different tellings make no sense therefore. Also, if the scriptures are divinely inspired, wouldn’t there be only one perspective then, God’s perspective, since he is the one doing the inspiring. The story only makes a resemblance of sense when we consider them to be the work of men.
@@akinlajajeremiah3824 We expect GOD to Tell us a story like a comic book straight and to the point! But you have to remember our ways are not GOD’S WAYS. Luke 8:10 “And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of GOD but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.”
Two different geneologies, with Matthew's tracing the legal descent and Luke's the matrilinial. The diverge at the sons of David, with one from Samson, and the other from Nathan.
Thank you for your study and sharing of knowledge which I can follow and understand, I am a regular fellow who is trying to gain basic knowledge of many religions. ✌👍
In 1910 Ivan Panin, a Russian/ American Harvard math genius and linguistic expert, proved the Bible mathematically. Watch - Math proves the Bible. Most recently a 30 year veteran cold case criminologist J. Warner Wallace proved the Bible forensically in his book, Person of Interest. His testimony would convince any jury of the veracity of the Bible. Some of the amazing things in the Bible include the prophecy of the fall of Tyre and the prophecy of Alexander the great. Bible firsts include knowing life being in the blood long before modern science, or the Bible knowing about mountains and currents in the oceans or how the earth hangs on nothing. You should know about the prophecies fulfilled by Jesus and the impossible odds of that happening. The Bible is a reliable collection of historical documents written down by eye witnesses during the lifetime of other eye witnesses. They report to us supernatural events that took place in fulfillment of specific prophecies and claim that the writings are divine rather than human in origin. The Bible has also been proven archaeologically, historically and linguistically. 2 Peter 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. It also predates the Quran by six hundred years. Watch - The life of Mohammed (According to Islamic sources)
Yeah but people say the bible is the word of God? And they say that God is perfect, so why did he compel people to write a book full of contradictions? Doesn't add up at all
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Each of the four Gospels presents Jesus Christ from a different point of emphasis.
Matthew, being a Levite, emphasizes Jesus as the Messiah, the Lion of the Tribe of Judah. Each of the subtleties of his design supports this primary theme. His genealogy begins with the "first Jew," Abraham, and continues through David and the royal line to the legal father of Jesus, Joseph.
As a customs official, Matthew was skilled in shorthand, and focuses on what Jesus said, and includes the extensive discourses, which he probably was able to take down verbatim.
Matthew's first miracle is the cleansing of a leper, a Jewish metaphor for sin itself. Matthew concludes with the resurrection, also a distinctive Jewish preoccupation.
Luke was a Gentile and a doctor, and his Gospel reflects a very distinctive point of view, emphasizing Jesus as the Son of Man. His genealogy begins with Adam, the first man. From Abraham to David, his list is identical to that of Matthew. However, when he gets to David, he doesn't track through Solomon (the first surviving son of Bathsheba) but through a different son, Nathan (the second surviving son of Bathsheba). He continues through to Heli, the father of Mary. (Joseph is the son-in-law of Heli). As a Gentile, Luke's emphasis is different. His emphasis is Christ's humanity; he focuses on what Jesus felt. His first miracle is the expulsion of a demon, a very human concern. Luke concludes with the promise of the giving of the Holy Spirit, which is a natural bridge to his subsequent volume, The Book of Acts .
Mark is the amanuensis (secretary) for Peter, and he emphasizes Jesus as the obedient Servant of YHWH. His is the only Gospel with no concern for pedigree or genealogy. He focuses on what Jesus did ; it deals in graphic images, almost like a movie or video shooting script. Mark concludes with the final visual appearance, the Ascension.
John had a very distinctive view, emphasizing Jesus as the Son of God. He focuses on who Jesus was . His "genealogy" is that of the Preexistent One, constituting his opening verses. His Gospel is organized around seven miracles, seven discourses, and seven "I AM" statements
John's first miracle involves the use of the water of purification being changed to wine at Cana, a private demonstration to the disciples that Jesus was preeminent even over the Levitical priesthood. John concludes with the promise of Jesus' return, and becomes the appropriate prequel to John's final tome, The Revelation .
It is interesting that each time we encounter the "super-angels" (variously called cherubim or seraphim ) that surround the Throne of God, we note that there are four "faces" involved: a lion, an ox, a man, and an eagle.
It is interesting that each of these "faces" are suggestive of each of the four Gospels: Matthew, presenting the Lion of the Judah; Mark, the ox (the classic emblem of servanthood); Luke, the Son of Man; and John, the Son of God in the heavens.
The Bible is an amazing treasure hunt.
You would like the book, “Person of Interest”, by cold-case forensic detective, J Warner Wallace.
❤❤❤❤
John the eagle -seeing from up above and Luke the man seeing what a man would
@@Dora-hi2nwI do not know of any such proofs and how do they know they were written centuries after while even Roman history tracks down to the times of the apostles?
😅😂😂 book written by holy spirit as different point of view? 😮😮😮
Another great video Religiosity Plus! Always look forward to what you will release next. Very well presented and easy to watch and listen to. Keep up the great productions!
Thank you Spirit Guru! I've been away for a while but hope to pump out new videos much more frequently in 2023!
Great video! I think the only think it’s missing is the idea that Matthew wrote Jesus’s genealogy through Joseph, while Luke wrote the genealogy through Mary. From what I have studied, in Hebrew culture they memorize names of their father and their fathers that come before. I love the fact that was added about the 141414. I didn’t know that! However, I believe Luke went against the cultural approach and followed Mary’s genealogy since she is the only parent to actually share blood ties with Jesus. When looking at the genealogy from both books they are the same (outside of where they start) until they reach Dawit. After Dawit Matthew says Solomon, while in Luke it says Nathan. I don’t think it was a mistake, I believe it was done on purpose to prove Jesus was the promised one from both Mary and Joseph. Satisfying the cultural traditions and their true blood ties with Mary and God seen in Luke!
Mary's genealogy would have taken him to the tribe of Levi not Judah. She was not related to King David.
Mary being from the tribe of Levi allowed Jesus to become a Rabbi. If you think Jesus wasn't a Rabbi, then you didn't read the Bible.
@@erichwentz2866 interesting can you show me the verse that state she came from the tribe of Levi? Because if she didn’t come from David Gods promise would technically not be true since Jesus has 0 relations with Joseph. At the end of the day Rabbi just means teacher.
But both can be true. I believe Luke 3 is going through the genealogy through Mary father. But the tribe of Levi come through her mother.
@@jonathanhabtegiorgis6010 two things for you.... 1) bloodline is blood adoption doesn't cover that. 2) by saying Rabbi is another name for teacher, tells me you know very little about the subject. A Rabbi would never call another man a Rabbi, unless he was an actual Rabbi. The mother of a Rabbi absolutely must come from the tribe of Levi. This would not be up for a debate in their time. Jesus was a Rabbi and had his own ministry. The Messiah comes from both Levi (Rabbi) and Judah (King).
I have opened the door, it is for you to seek and find. May God bless you in your discovery.
The Gospel of Luke is to be taken with a grain of salt 🧂. His book is 2nd, 3rd and 4th accounts of Jesus's life. He never met him or even heard him speak. Everything Luke wrote was technically heresay.
Also, I must point out that in the Hebrew version Isaiah wrote a young woman would give birth. In the Greek version it says a virgin will give birth. Funny how the European Catholic Church uses the Greek version instead of the Hebrew (original) version.
Bottom line... my God Yahweh doesn't impregnate virgins, that's the Greco-Roman Zeus who does that.
Mary and Joseph were quite poor. We know this because they brought two turtle doves instead of a lamb to
his presentation in the temple (what you called the purification, in this video). I doubt they owned a camel. I’ve always thought they made the trip from Nazareth to Bethlehem with Joseph walking and Mary riding a donkey. Also, I’ve heard that Mary likely walked to visit Elizabeth who was pregnant with John the Baptist. It’s about 85 miles and probably took her over a week each way. Mama Mary definitely was one tough lady!
but her first trip (the one to her cousin elisabeth) was when she was not even one mouth pregnant, then it is still easy to travel.
I guess I don’t consider walking 85 miles on unpaved trails, pregnant or not, easy
Joseph wasn't poor, he is a direct descendent of King David and probably lived on royal land. Also, everyone knew and respected Joseph in Nazareth. He also owned and operated his own business.
Poor he wasn't, they also could afford to pay for Jesus schooling at the synagogue for 18 years.
Excellent video. The gospels of Matthew and Luke are in fact the only 2 books in entire NT that have birth narrative
Thank you Gerald! Great to hear from you again!
Great video as always. I'd be interested in knowing more differences between the gospels. Pretty cool to do a side by side analysis.
Comparative analysis of the gospels is very fascinating! Peace to you!
Fascinating! So glad you're back with another video. Love learning more about the secrets hidden within the gospels
Thanks Pat! I hope to upload much more frequently in 2023! 😊
Which version do you like better? Weird that there are so many differences, but the core is the same, which is the most important. Woohoo Jesus!
Thank you Whitley for the comment! I think I like Matthew's version best just because I think he is a bit more creative in the way he tells the story. Luke's version seems a little more straightforward and to the point. 😊
@@ReligiosityPlus Can I assume we agree that these are not just 2 mens writings but they are Holy Spirit inspired and breathed?
That’s the mystery of God
@@ExperienceEricI don't think so that's why he said "story".
@@RyanJones-ew8vm Virtually all secular scholars agree Jesus was a real person, lived in Galilee, crucified by Pilate and worshiped by the 1st century church as the risen Savior.
Dude where ya been?! Great video. Thanks!!
Thank you No Edge to A Dream! I recently got a new job, so I've been settling in there these past few months. But I hope to make videos much more frequently in 2023! Much love!
As someone who studies history it’s maddening at times when you have people at the same scene describe things very differently from each other. Sometimes contradicting the other.
Luke is Mary’s and Mathew’s is Joseph. The last part says son of not begat. Mary was from David’s line in blood. Joseph was the heir and king and he adopted Jesus as son. So Jesus had the adopted right as Joseph’s son and the blood of David from Mary. Like everything in the Bible, it is perfect.
Read the text, fella. Neither one is about Mary.
@@lostfan5054 yes it is fella. Do you think that no one has confronted this in the history of Christianity? That there is just this huge glairing difference that everyone just overlooks? The only people who do not accept the 2 separate genealogies are those who have a want to discredit the Bible. Every major and minor Christian denomination that I know accepts this understanding of the genealogies. The best explanation I could find in a quick search comes from Doug Bookman in an article called "The Genealogies of Jesus." In my experience people who try to make something out of this section of the Bible have a bias and cling to what they can and refuse to accept any explanation. Either way, acceptance or not, have a great holiday and God bless.
@@dylankahler981 you really think that when presented with a contradicton, believers would just stop believing? Faith is not based on reason, so when presented with good reason to stop believing, they still won't.
There are contradictions, regardless of the terrible explanations believers have thought up in the past centuries.
Both genealogies are Joseph's, regardless of how much you want to delude yourself into believing that the bible says something it just doesn't.
@@lostfan5054 if Mary and Joseph followed the Judean tradition of being betrothed patrilineal first cousins in an arranged marriage, then yes, there is going to be overlaps in family genealogy until you get to that last few generations. Heck, husbands and wives today could be 15th or 16th cousins with their common ancestor being a Lord from the Elizabethan court or something wild like that.
@@angelahull9064 this is a good point, and I suspect Joseph and Mary were probably cousins or something. That was very common back then.
My greater point is that the Bible doesn't say this. It says Joseph was a descendant of David. So unless you believe Jesus was the son of Joseph, the bible doesn't say Jesus was descended from David. That's your own inference based off extra-biblical stuff like Judean tradition
Another thing you didn't mention is the fact that Yeshua's (Jesus) birthday is never given .The fact is if you study the date dec.25, you will find that most pagun gods are said to be born on this day. Question: Why did they give him a pagun birthday date .?
The pagans were the ones who adopted this date to compete with Christianity
@dimitris.zahariadis lol were do you get your information 😂
IF YOU CAN PROVE THAT ,PROVE IT.Oh, and the bible does say the shepherds were in the field at night with their sheep.Which would never happen it's to cold in Dec.and there is nothing for the sheep to eat.His birthday is not given in the bible
It's the paguns that gave him dec.25 ...which is not biblical. try again dumb dumb .
@@danaleanne38the fact you won’t have a single ancient calendar with the day dec 25th being attributed to any deity before Christianity became widespread in Rome when Constantine turned to Christianity the early 300s, with most the calendars found with dec 25th being attributed to any pagan deity coming in the mid/late 300s. When we combine that with the fact that the calendars which predate this have pagan sun god worship in what we consider early fall, it’s very clear that the pagan worship holiday was moved AFTER Christians adopted December 25th as Christ’s birthday. And that date was chosen due to Christian tradition that the day Christ died would also be the day of his annunciation (his conception) and this 9 months later would be December 25th.
So now we have the evidence to see when pagan worship was moved and how December 25th was actually chosen. So no, Jesus’ birthday wasn’t just picked to follow in the steps of pagan sun god worship. This is just another argument people bring up when they don’t understand any of the history behind Christmas and believe it’s a way to have a “gotcha” moment.
@@dimitris_zaha The pagans came first, dimwit.
After watching a bunch of your videos, I must say... you have the absolute best collection of music T-shirts I've ever seen!
Excellent content. Your channel is sure to grow.
Thank you AcrylicGoblin! I have to show my love of Rock n' Roll somehow! 😊.
I really appreciate your kind words! Peace to you!
It's Protestant
The Mother of God is Ever-Virgin.
The Bible says Joseph did not know her until Jesus was born. That's true
But in ancient Greek "until" doesn't work the same way it typically does in English.
When Christ says "I will be with you,even until the end of the age" does that mean Jesus is leaving when the age is over? No.
I do not see any references in Luke about 54 generations? Please show me where? Thank you.
Just found ya man love hearing about the things that aren't in the Bible but still touch on Jesus and the times
Thank you Big Joe! Your kind words mean a lot! Much love!
From my understanding the book of Matthew was the only gospel that was written in Hebrew, compared to the language the other gospels were written in Greek. If this is possibly true, then wouldn't the interpretation between the two languages read differently anyway? I'm just curious, your intake in this video was quite interesting. The book of Matthew is one of my favorite books of the gospels to read, the other is John. Blessings to you!!!
It was koine Greek like them all
There is no evidence that Matthew was written in Hebrew. There are no manuscripts or copies of Matthew’s gospel in Hebrew. When it was referenced by the early church fathers, they used Matthew’s Greek gospel.
Matthew was originally written in Aramaic. That's the later dialect. Sort of how Hebrew language changed over time and was the version of the language which was used during the period.
The Aramaic was found in the caves of the dead sea scrolls.
At the beginning of his gospel, Luke made it clear that he's not an eye witness and that his work was a result of "careful investigation". Sometimes the truth depends on the source of information one happens to land on. But the important thing in my opinion, is whether Jesus is the Messiah and his birth was indeed in fulfillment of the scripture.
"The truth" is never dependent on the source. The story is often; the truth exists independent of the source.
The problem is that “the fulfillment of the scriptures” is a total fabrication.
One gospel writer looked at the old testament “prophecy” “from Egypt I called my son” and invented a nice little story about Jesus fleeing to Egypt in the middle of the night.
Even a child knows that it’s all made up. Supernatural stories from primitive, superstitious people! Time to grow up!
Take the time to actually count the names listed in the third group of 14 in Mathew. If the Joseph listed there is Jesus' father as stated in this video, then there are only 13 generations from David to Jesus. The word translated "husband" can also be translated "father". As Mary is Jesus' human parent, it is through her that the throne of David must come, and not her husband. Luke, however, shows the genealogy of Joseph, Mary's husband which is important not for Jesus's immediate claim to the throne of David, but for the legal requirement for him to be established as being from the House of David also. The Book of Numbers (Ch 27) lays out the way a woman may inherit, and for Mary to retain the claim of a direct descendant of David, she would have to marry someone who was also of the House of David, hence the establishing that Joseph her husband was also of the House of David.
Most of the events recorded in Luke occur shortly after His birth, and the events recorded in Mathew (the arrival of the Magi, for example) occur when Jesus is about a year and a half old. The two gospels are not of the same identical events: Mathew shows Him as a King with a legal claim to His ancestors' throne, and Luke shows Him as a Man among men. In reading the Bible, and the Gospels in particular, do not confuse identical events with similar ones. Too often the casual reader wants to make them the same, but this will give rise to supposed errors and conflicts when there are none.
Good explanation! Much more details of the story can be found in Maria Valtorta's Poem of Man-God, which were revealed by Our Lord for us living today so that we may not stray from the True Faith in this time of tribulations and coming Antichrist who will deny everything about Our Lord. By the way, from the Poem of Man-God, we know that Our Lord was about 10 month old when the Magi came and worshipped Him, before they fled to Egypt, for His 1st birthday occurred at Matarea, near Cairo (Vol. 1, p.723).
@hyeminkwun9523 why weren't they revealed to us in the Bible instead this book you mentioned that's published in the 20th Century?
Matthew 13:15
“For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.”
❤
Another similarity is that Herod the Great is mentioned in both Gospels (though his massacre of the innocents is not mentioned in St. Luke). Chapter 1, verse 5.
What it comes down to is what a pastor once told me. "The Bible is like the manger. They both hold Jesus, but, being man-made, there's a few bent nails here and there."
Love that saying! You’ve got a good pastor!
Is it man made
There is so much you miss and look over. Because one says something and the other omits doesn’t mean anything. The genealogy is not wrong. The magi came later. The Shepard’s were day more during the actual census. It’s all there you just have to actually do you research.
Notice how he doesn't respond to those that call him out
the shaperd where there the day of jesus birth, the magi came 2 years later, by then the young child lived in a house!
@@alyssabeale1095Why answer someone who simply asserts nonsense, without even a semblance of coherence, let alone any evidence. The plain language fo these two accounts is utterly contradictory; harmonizing them through bizarre and baseless claims is simply childish bullshit.
Luke says that everyone had to go to their hometown (or "their own city" depending on the translation) for the registration (or "census" or "taxation" or "enrolment" depending on the translation) and then stops to explain why Bethlehem is Joseph's hometown. In other words, Luke uses time and papyrus space to explain that Mary is from Nazareth in Galilee while Joseph is from Bethlehem in Judea. Because of this, some Scholars also consider that the "inn" translation is a mistake and it actually means an "upper room" in the home of Joseph's relatives or parents. And if someone wonders why Joseph and Mary were getting married if they were once from different cities and different regions, then in ancient times it was no more strange than if today you marry someone who lives in a different city and region (however, the difference is of course that today marriages are arranged less frequently). And if anyone is wondering what Joseph was doing in Nazareth, the local wedding custom of that time was that the groom arrived at the bride's home to pick up the bride for the wedding.
The census though historically speaking would not have called for you to report to the land of your ancestors but the land you would actually live in so can anyone clarify why they returned to the home of the ancestors when this has been disproven
Very true. It’s because the birth narratives are theological and not entirely historical.
Why are you using Iconography in your thumbnail with no halos around Sts. Luke and Matthew?
There are things that we as westerners dont fully understand looking at things at face value but look into “levirate marriage.”
If a man died without having any sons, it was tradition for the man’s brother to marry the widow and have a son who would carry on the deceased man’s name.
This way Jesus can be both from the line of Mary and the line of Joseph and fulfill prophecy.
A lot of this stuff has already been thought over for centuries , even just a few google searches shows that many things in this video are just misinterpretations or not fully understanding bronze age ancient Israelite genealogy customs , which i dont blame you for not knowing it
Just a thought/theory?: Could these two Gospels (Matthew & Luke around Jesus' birth) be an answer/a reflection of the two different Genisis? 🤔 I dunno 😅
Did Jesus have genetic material from Joseph, if not, why does Joseph's genealogy even matter?
Story one: Tyler went to Burger King to buy his sister a whopper because she was bothering him about it. He then stopped by Walmart to buy himself a book. When he returned, his sister was angry because the food was cold so he fled from her room.
Story two: Tyler left one day from his house and stopped at Burger King, Walmart, and Starbucks. When he returned, he showed his sister all the things he purchased but swiftly left the room, leaving with nothing but the scratches his sister gifted him back.
Note: All of these things happened, they are both accurate accounts. They do not contradict, one simply leaves out information and one adds information.
Moral of the story: Don’t keep your sister waiting when she’s hungry.
That's not at all what's happening here. It's more like, story two: Tyler left one day from his house and stopped at burger king, walmart and Starbucks. On his way back, his car was hit by another driver and he had to be taken to the hospital. Tyler was diagnosed with a cracked rib cage and a broken femur, and spent several weeks in the hospital recovering. On the day he was discharged his sister picked him up and he suggested they stop by Burger King to get the burger she had asked for the night of the accident. She became annoyed at him, as if her cravings mattered at all in the moment. In truth her anger was rooted in guilt, for had she not requested Burger King her brother wouldn't have been in an accident. Can you reconcile those accounts? Only if you're emotionally invested in the two accounts being reconciled and your entire world view depends on it. Then you desperately reach for ridiculous explanations as to how these accounts are really just different accounts of the same events.
@@omarmunoz5787 wow umm, thanks for the read. And while I’m not of the same though, I still appreciate you reading through what I had to say and sharing your own thoughts.
For some reason I’m craving a burger.
@@JoeBuck-uc3bl I feel like a burger now as well. Might get fries with that.
@@omarmunoz5787i think that happens to everyone in every worldview. Just look as secular scientists scramble to reconcile evidence like soft tissue in fossils or presnce of carbon 14 at all or fossilization that implies flash flood more than gradual build up. I think it depends on which worldview is more consistent and less arbitrary and more foundational for the presuppositions of intelligibility
John doesn’t really talk about Jesus’ birth but he talks about how Jesus came to earth.
“The WORD (Divine) became FLESH (human).
What’s the connection between 14 and David? Really wasn’t explained well
14 can be split into 4-6-4. The Hebrew letters equivalent to those figures spell the Hebrew name of David.
What I love about his birth celebration:
Shepherds were visited in the field about a Savior born laying in a manger, a Light of the World. A host of Angels appeared singing. You talk about a grand entrance! Nobody does it better. Kings/wisemen of the East saw a star that heralded a birth of a King, King of the Jews. (Remember on the Cross Pilot the Governor had it written King of the Jews).
He was born where animals were kept.... Laying in a manger. Shepherds were told about it and how significant is that, Shepherds whose sole job is taking care of sheep and lambs, were privileged to told about the best lamb...the Lamb of God.
They are not meant to be the same. The are eye witness accounts; which all eye witness accounts are similar but hardly the same.
Extremally interesting, but where does the donkey come from or the stable and what are the clues that point to a date of birth? I wish the video was longer.
I mean, if they are both right (cause you won't claim one of them is wrong and one is right) and they don't contradict each other, then how is it possible these stories are so different? I mean, is there really a way both stories are actually correct? Cause it seems a lot of things don't add up
There are a few biblical scholars who can help - Jacob Prasch, Vodie Baucham, or Chuck Missler. Once explained it seems obvious. You might also like the perspective of a cold case homicide detective, J Warner Wallace, whose book, Person of Interest, helps you understand why different witnesses can have different narratives yet still be accurate.
This guy is crazy Matthew focus on Joseph side while Luke focus on Merry
It is very much known in the cognitive sciences that eye witnesses of the same event may report very different things (researchers are still studying the differences in eye witness reports of the 9/11 attacks; even though it was thoroughly documented in multiple forms of media, people still get some details wrong), but the overlaps are still consistent. It would be a more problematic contradiction if one Gospel reported the birth in Bethlehem and another reported it in another town, like Nazareth. But both narratives are consistent with Bethlehem. Whether it was in a manger or a cave is a trivial detail to get wrong. And let us not make the mistake of thinking these narratives have events following in close succession of one another. The Holy Family likely stayed in Bethlehem for some time before the visitation of the Magi and the fleeing into Egypt.
@@angelahull9064 I guess I need to sit down and map out these things, but I should remind you none of the writers of the gospels were eye witnesses of Jesus' birth
Oral history came first, based on eye witness accounts.
Many stories make the narrative more interesting. Also Mary was definitely a tough person. Could you go through all she was subjected to?
what year did all this happen ..its 1024ad not 2024 ad? answer that
Matthew's lineage goes from Abiud--Mary's line. Luke's goes from Rhesa--Joesph's line. Matthew--27 generations of 40 years...from Solomon. Patriarchal--father's line. Luke--40 generations of 25 years...from Nathan. Matriarchal---mother's line. Both werw sons of Zerubbabel. Mary & Joseph also were related. Joseph was Mary's great-aunt Gadat's son. The birth story in Matthew is Jesus' actual birth into the world. Luke's story takes place 12 years later, in 6 AD. Luke is not making one of his alleged errors. It is about Jesus' 2d birth into the community. When the David was crowned, he was 'born' as the adopted 'Son of God', according to the words of the liturgy of coronation found in the 2d Psalm. When Mary 'brought him forth' she was following the symbolism in which the boy was separated from his mother. When he was 'wrapped in cloths,' he was being clothed in the ceremonial veatment. This is the year when the census was taken. Quirinius ordered the census, & he was never governor of Syria when Herod was alive. The census was a time when people had to register their property, & they weren't required to travel all over the country to do it. Jesus was born on Sunday March 1, 7BC in Bethlehem of Judea, a residential complex a kilometer south of Qumran. It was originally a palace for Hasmonean royalty, it was called the Queen's house. Also, because animals were stabled there, it was called the 'Manger'. When Joeph was told to 'flee into Egypt', it was not the literal Egypt. When the Egyptian Therapeuts were in Qumran, it was called 'Egypt', & Joseph with them was called 'Joseph in Egypt'. This was a suitable place to hide. The caves were already used as places for solitary meditation, & there were so many in the limestone cliffs that it was possible to stay undetected for a long time. The 'Gabriel' that told Joseph to takeMary as his wife was Simeon the Abiathar Priest. Basically, he told Joseph to treat the 1st marriage as if it were the 2d one, the binding one, because Jesus was conceived before the 1st marriage, which began the trial period. The part in the story about there being 'no room in the inn' means that Mary & Joseph were in the married state, & were not allowed into the KATALYMA, the upper room, the sacred dining chamber. They were not allowed into the highest form of communion, reserved for separated celibates. The meaning of the 'shepherds in the field' scenario is this: Down at Ain Feshkha, the 'farm', the pastors or 'shepherds' were meeting for the equinox The 'angel of the Lord' Simeon-Gabriel came to them & announced the new regime & and that the 12 year old Jesus would continue the succession. The ministers sang a hymn of praise, & declared the new policy: "Peace on earth". I hope this has been helpful in understanding the true events surrounding Jesus' birth, & also dispelling all of the supernatural elements.
Luke delves into the All Inclusiveness of Jesus- the Savior of ALL Humanity. Matthew focuses on relevant figures in Jewish history. Luke focuses on Jesus being the Son of Man- Human. Matthew focuses on Jesus' Divinity. Matthew focuses on the Law. Luke focuses on Grace.
If Jesus was the son of God, then how come Joseph's lineage is Jesus's lineage?
No. Matthew and Luke used Mark as their template. The genealogy in Matthew runs through the direct lineage of Joseph where Luke follows the lineage of Mary both of whom were descendants of David.
So you're saying that the author of Luke was using Hebrew gematria? But the gospels were written in Greek not Hebrew. Greek has its own gematria system
How do you get that Hosea 11:1 is God calling Jesus out of Egypt?
Reading the whole chapter it’s clearly about the children of Israel. Seems like Matthew ripped that out of context.
But the biggest mistake in the Bible is that Jesus' family was traced through Joseph, and Joseph is only Jesus' step father and not related to Jesus in any way. A true family history would only be through Mary. But women were only seen as property in the Bible, so this would have been unheard of.
Jews were getting married with people from the same tribe so Mary is also from David. Apart from that from the Law‘s perspective, the legal rights shall we say, these come from the father, in this case of course the apparent father.
And the women were treated as objects in pagan religions not in the Bible. And there are plenty of examples that support this.
@@konstantinoszeimpekis9874 1 Timothy 2:12, ” I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.”
Deuteronomy 22:28-29
28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
@@konstantinoszeimpekis9874 Your step father is not related to you in any way. The Bible authors were ignorant goat herders.
Thanks for the video. Your claims that the two accounts are very different are somewhat true; however, the differences don't pose contradictions. When the two accounts are placed together, they complement each other. When one mentions a fact that the other does not mention, we see complementation, not contradiction. The only part that appears to be contradictory is the genealogy; however, it was not uncommon for Jewish writers to substitute grandfathers for fathers in the records. Also, it is possible that Luke was tracing the genealogy through Mary, who was related to Joseph and shared many of the same relatives as her husband.
They don't tell different stories. They tell different aspects of the story.
Is the biggest contradiction between these two not just the simple difference in time?
(Matthew) - If they ALL went back to Israel after King Herod died (4BC),
(Luke) - how could Mary be pregnant and going to Bethlehem due to the census of Quirinius (6AD)? I'm open to hearing any explanations and potentially changing my mind so please feel free to comment haha
Is it True that in The Holy Bible Why the Gyneology of Jesus Christ is Different in Mathew 1-1 and Luke 3-23.. In Mathew 1-1 The Father of Joseph the Carpenter is Jacob And in Luke 3-23 The Father of Joseph the Carpenter is Heli..??🙏🙏🙏
Well done video!
Thanks!
Neither account does anything to discredit the other or even suggest that one or both could be wrong.
Absolutely fantastic video! I love your neutrality, and how you present the knowledge. To my understanding, the wise men approached Jesus when he was a 2-year-old. If i remember correctly the Greek used is child, and not that of a newborn unlike Lukes which using Greek to describe newborn. Perhaps Mary and Joseph returned to Nazareth but faced slander from the locals and returned back to Bethlehem to get away from it. After the fleet to Egypt, and hearing that Herrods pass over slaughtering son took charge in Judah they returned to Nazareth as a last resort.
But there are contradictions, many actually.This is a great video and topic. The majority of Christians know the story of Jesus as an amalgamation of the gospels. Each author tells a widely varying tale and the variations are often in very important aspects of the gospel. One would imagine the inerrant word of an omniscient god would tell a decisive narrative that leaves no room for variation or interpretation for that matter. When speaking on the historicity of the Jesus story these facts can't be overlooked and distorted by apologists.
More of an inaccuracy. Not because two people differ in their story on one person, doesn’t mean that person does not exist or the story about him are all false. And oh, Luke was not even an Apostle of Jesus. He just heard it from another Apostle.
And yes, the Gospels were written by human and there bound to be inconsistencies. Don’t you know how word of mouth works?
And yes, these Gospels were written decades apart. It is not like they were sitting in one room writing their own version of the story.
maybe just maybe they are all different narrations of the same whole story. all i see here are two narrations that probably compliment each other if we really dig deep... a lot of the time you did mention that one book didnt mention certain things but at the same time did not contradict. therefore all i see here is the same story but of different scenes
Did Joseph have any children before he knew Blessed Mother Mary , he was much older than Her, I was very curious about this😊✝️🇺🇸🎄 Merry Christmas Happy New Year and God bless all of us in the world we call home together ⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄⛄
Matthew is Joseph's perspective, and Luke is Mary's perspective.
EXACTLY. But also note that Joseph is a descendant of David (King), and Mary (cousin of Elizabeth) is ALSO a descendant of Aaron (Priest). Jesus was both King and Priest. And this is WHY each author chose to tell the story from those perspectives and chose to include only events that highlighted those views. I wonder how many other events were not included - John 21:25 tells us exactly this.
Really good point. It’s quite possible that Luke could have had access to Mary herself when writing his Gospel account, or at least he could have had access to the Apostle John, her adopted son.
2:35, mathews geneology is via Joseph, luke's geneology is Via Mary, the number 14 is not important, because in both geneology, he is being mentioned as son of David.
I really do believe that these 2 gospels have very little differences between them, and I do hope & pray 🙏 that if I am incorrect, that ALMIGHTY GOD will forgive me ❤😢😢😢😢😊
We should pray to be guided the right path by god...
I think that you missed something very important about the two genealogy in both books. In Luke account you have all men, but in Matthew you have Rahab and Ruth in it. This maybe the way Matthew is saying this is Mary genealogy and not Joseph. And the way Luke end his genealogy is say that Joseph was not the physical father of Jesus.
Very good information! Thank you!
It’s weird to me that Christians never want to consider that authors could be mistaken. We are all taught that the idea that there’s divine something something that means what they wrote was true. But we know that when God speaks to us it isn’t like an intercom system.
Also, some things in the Bible that aren’t directly from God or Jesus, could be the result of the Apostles’ own ideas and not God. An example of that might be Ephesians where Paul says women should submit to their husbands. Is that too much thinking? Or does it seem like a lack of faith?
Call me crazy, but the only things I find definite are God and Jesus. And even then we should always consider translation and author errors.
Luke was not an original disciple. He was a well-educated Greek physician who wrote his book and Acts based on interviews of multiple people.
Lee Strobels book ,” Case for. Christ” is really good at describing what was going on at the time.
Since Joseph is not the biological father of Jesus, his genealogy is of no importance to the story.
Mary's travels visiting relatives are not so bad. My mom and dad took us kids on road-trip vacations, routinely involving eight or more hours ride per day for two days back to back, then a break day exploring local sites ... often including visits to relatives. I can appreciate Joseph and Mary not traveling in a Buick, but as I remember the Gospels they were more likely to travel by donkey than by camel.
Mary was an awesome lady in many ways but I think we can attribute this performance to her being a typically motivated Jewish mother with strong family connections 😅 .
Why is Josephs's ancestry covered if he is not the father of Jesus? Never understood that one. For Jesus to be descended from David it should be through Mary.
What? The line was always from the man.
@@Nomad58 but Joseph is not related to Jesus so why his line?
@@beauxcarroll8348 Joseph is in the line of David. That was what was prophesied I think.
Because the messiah was yo come from the line of David
Mathew seems written from Joseph’s perspective.
Just because both story contradicts the other mean something is wrong. You may say this is an excuse but we have to keep in mind that they may only rely to memorization and different sources because of the oral tradition back in those times. It may not be as precise and accurate but the story is just trying to convey the birth of Christ whether they are similar or not. Just like the nonsensical debate between denominations that Jesus wasn’t born on December 25. Yes nothing is mentioned in the scriptures and holding to the plot of the story that it could be on September when shepherds watch their flocks by night, but just because we don’t know the exact date doesn’t necessarily meant we don’t have to pick the date. What matters is we celebrate his birthday, historically accurate or not. Are we even living in an honest life if we keep focusing on the accuracy on everything we believe. Do we have to check whats unseen in the juice of an orange fruit before we even eat it? Do we have to check the air we breathe if it’s clean? Even preachers and bible teachers have different interpretations on scriptures but do we have to be so keep which doctrine is correct? It’s all in our faith and one must remain focused on the message and purpose behind the scriptures rather than tearing them apart in search of contradictions. The Bible was not written as a modern history book but as a collection of divinely inspired accounts that reveal God’s plan for humanity. The beauty of the Gospels lies in their complementary perspectives, each offering unique insights into the life and mission of Jesus Christ.
Whether or not the Nativity accounts perfectly align, they both point to the same truth: the miraculous birth of our Savior, who came to redeem us. It’s not about proving who’s right or wrong but about understanding the deeper message of God’s love and salvation. Instead of debating trivial details, why not focus on the transformative power of Jesus in our lives?
Faith is not about having all the answers or proving every detail correct; it’s about trusting God even when we don’t fully understand. Let’s not let debates distract us from the bigger picture-Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection for our salvation. As Christians, our mission is not to win arguments but to lead others to Christ. Let’s celebrate His birth, His love, and His sacrifice with hearts full of gratitude and faith.
No, Luke did not use Matthew as a source. Matthew and Luke both used Mark and Q (lost to us). They each had their own unique sources: called by scholars M for Matthew and L for Luke. Unlikely that they were aware of each other's accounts. Btw, we don't actually know who the authors were nor where they were located. They both were Greek speakers, rather than Aramaic, the language of Jesus.
They definitely are contradictory. Read them side by side. Also, it is unlikely Jesus went anywhere near Bethlehem.
Qumram near jerusalem was also called egypt by the locals. So it fits the narative
A heck of a lot of traveling back and forth for people who probably didn’t go anywhere if you ask me. It is 90 miles from Galilee to Bethlehem each way.
my question to you is were they there to watch it or not
Well, seeing as they documented words Jesus said when he was alone (Example: Garden of Gethsemane) I'd have to say no, the gospel writers were not there to witness Jesus' birth.
Nice story, but you forgot something. Because you're talking about the lineage of Joseph. And Joseph wasn't the father of Jesus! So Jesus didn't come from the lineage of David. So the bible is wrong anyway.
👍👍
Great video!
Thank you Nicole! 😊
DON'T BE SO SILLY! If you have an x-ray, say of you knee they will take two views - AP and lateral - very different pictures, but of the same knee, just from different angles - that's all. And that's how it is with Matthew and Luke - THEY JUST TELL DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE SAME STORY - no one with any intelligence thinks anything different!
One is from Joseph's family line. The other is from Mary's family line. Both are from the line of David.
That's not correct, Mary came from the tribe of Levi. She was a temple virgin as her father was a Rabbi in the synagogue. Same with Elizabeth, Zachariah ( John the Baptist father ) was the Rabbi in his synagogue.
Mary came from the house of Rabbi. Joseph came from the house of King. This is why Jesus had claims to both.
Luke writes about Mary's family history & not her husbands that is listed in Matthew's.
If that is case, why didn’t Luke clearly state that. Joseph is clearly stated in the gospel of Luke
There was no Luke and Mathew, only some unknown writers wrote the bibles in accordance to Luke and Mathew respectively. Whether those writers consulted both of them did not matter since the writers, Luke, and Mathew were not known of their identities.
One problem...If the lineage is from David to Joseph to prove that the messiah is a direct descendant of King David, then it all falls apart as Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus...It would have had to be a line from David to Mary for this to be true...
We should pray to be guided the right path by god....
Luke documented Mary's genealogy not Joseph.
Thank you
I think the message is the same, Matthew spent time with Jesús and Mary,Luke, and the other hand was not a direct Apostle of Jesús, he spent more time with Paul. Maybe that’s why the message is a little different.
Matthew 26:36-44 (NIV)
36 Then Jesus went with his disciples to a place called Gethsemane, and he said to them, “Sit here while I go over there and pray.”
37 He took Peter and the two sons of Zebedee along with him, and he began to be sorrowful and troubled.
38 Then he said to them, “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death. Stay here and keep watch with me.”
39 Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.”
40 Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. “Couldn’t you men keep watch with me for one hour?” he asked Peter.
41 “Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.”
42 He went away a second time and prayed, “My Father, if it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be done.”
43 When he came back, he again found them sleeping, because their eyes were heavy.
44 So he left them and went away once more and prayed the third time, saying the same thing.
Didn't watch. If title is meant to be an accurate assessment of the bottom line--how many times do we have to go over this? Luke tells story of birth night. Matthew's tale took place up to two years later. Read the book, "Christmas Revisited" by Robert Simms. We've put so much myth into this story we hardly know what happened and what didn't.
So you decided to click on a video you knew you would not watch to voice your uninformed opinion based on a title you “assume” you would disagree with. Color me impressed!
@@ReligiosityPlus There's nothing uninformed about my opinion. In fact, it wasn't an opinion. It was a statement of fact. I also didn't assume what the content of the video was; I responded to the TITLE of the video, which should mean something. If it was a title that misled the surfer as to what the video was really about, then just ignore what I said. It's easy to do.
I responded to your comment because I found it kind of humorous. I still find it funny that you won’t watch, as if there is nothing you could possibly learn from it. Perhaps I present an argument you’ve not heard before? If that’s the case, you’ll never know because you judged a video by its title. Not the behavior of an open minded seeker of knowledge if you ask me.
Bruh The named itself already saying both are different gospel…. But they ain’t contradicted each other, makes both of them are authentic
Mary was full of faith. She also watched her firstborn brutally tourchered . She then watched her baby boy humiliate stripped naked, and then she watched her child die on the cross by crucifixion. Mary wasn't just tough. Mary was faithful, full of grace, blessed, and chosen by The Lord CREATOR OF THE HEAVEN AND EARTH.
Why is it the first Christmas story?
You're discourse omits that Lukes genealogy covers Mary and Joseph covers David and the switch comes with Solomon with Joseph and Nathan with Mary.. Homework for you; check out Why the switch with Solomon/ Nathan.
Best of His Grace.
Bo Bowditch 😁
If 2 men see a car crash, and one mentions birds flying by before the crash and the other mentions hearing a man yell before the crash, are they contradicting each other? No, see you said joseph being the son of david. Every jew considers therefore fathers still to be there father no matter the time gap. So technically king david is everyone's father under him and on description is more accurate than the other, but neither contradict each other the information is being filled in. Because the car crash remained consistent and the details mentioned paint a clearer picture from eye witnesses. The gospel is the same, all speak on jesus on what he did and from those accounts we can tell what was most consistent which were miracles, his death and resurrection his message and his purpose for being there with some adding details the others miss or simply explaining as is from their perspective, the revelation of christ is sifting through all their findings to get the bigger picture of who he was.
There's a chapter in the Qur'an titled 'Mary' which explains the birth of Jesus Christ.
Actually... Mary is the ONLY female to be mentioned in the Qur'an.
Justice for aisha
Muhammad ( police be upon him) would love to bring that up
@@paigekyllonen6613the age thing has beem refuted by several scholars. But christians don't care they run with their/your hatred. Sad.
Well, that 14 thing is 😎. So, 14 x 3, makes perfect sense to me. My mom studied her family ancestry atleast back to early pilgrims. Hard to remember all the 'first borns' except for most part of couple centuries they all had basically the same name. She managed back only 11 gens. 😅 For us that was a lot.
The details might differ, but the central teachings of the gospel are the same.
There are no contradictions and this holds true for the entire Bible when you examine it.
"no contradictions"? Are you blind? Can you read? There are differences. Why in Matthew did he NOT mention a census? Why in Matthew did he not say of the so called journey to Bethlehem on a donkey for Mary? Luke has shepherds visit Jesus, but no mention of Kings from the east - Matthew mentions the kings, but no mention of shepherds. Matthew doesn't say Jesus was born in a stable in a manger. Luke does. There are contradictions.
No reply no?
@@johnking5174 you literally did not mention one single contradiction. Those were omittions. That happens throughout history. Do you think that everyone that witnessed the attack on September 11th would give the same account of what happened that day?? You are not using common sense. Sad.
@@LajontahsBackup Isn't it the "word of God"? - Shouldn't it be 100% correct? Why omit certain things, if they really happened? This is the get out of jail free card you religious use all the time.
@@johnking5174 it is not incorrect. Why are you behaving like a child? I literally just gave you the perfect example of how two accounts could contain completely different information but the main premise of the accounts are all similar and they would both be accurate.
Most scholars believe Luke used Mark as a source not Matthew
Are you specific to Christianity based videos or just videos on religion and theology across the world ?
I like to do videos on all kinds of religious and theological topics, but Christianity has so many different topics to explore. In the next month or two I plan to mix it up much more. Thanks for the comment Cameron Shaffer!
Job 14:14
“If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come.”
Two different perspectives, but no contradictions. They both agree Jesus was born, and was indeed the son of God. Amen
The four gospels are the same events seen through
Four different perspectives.
GOD IS GREAT !
I am tired of this perspective trope. I was taught this as a kid and took it at face value. What exactly do we mean by perspective and whose perspective. Take for instance the birth story in this video, the story is basically around Joseph, Mary and the baby Jesus. Whose perspective is being told. It is unarguable that Luke and Matthew’s author were not present. They must have at least being told the story. If there is any truth in the story itself then the retelling will likely be done by Mary since Joseph seemingly disappears from the story. It is safe to say there’s only one perspective to be told, Mary’s. The different tellings make no sense therefore.
Also, if the scriptures are divinely inspired, wouldn’t there be only one perspective then, God’s perspective, since he is the one doing the inspiring.
The story only makes a resemblance of sense when we consider them to be the work of men.
@@akinlajajeremiah3824 there are four gospels,it is the same story told through
Four different perspectives.
Same with the book of revelation.
@@savedbygrace8337 did you even read what I wrote.
@@akinlajajeremiah3824 We expect GOD to
Tell us a story like a comic book straight and to the point!
But you have to remember our ways are not GOD’S WAYS.
Luke 8:10
“And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of GOD but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.”
@@akinlajajeremiah3824 Isaiah 55:8
“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.”
Two different geneologies, with Matthew's tracing the legal descent and Luke's the matrilinial. The diverge at the sons of David, with one from Samson, and the other from Nathan.
Thank you for your study and sharing of knowledge which I can follow and understand, I am a regular fellow who is trying to gain basic knowledge of many religions. ✌👍
ua-cam.com/play/PL0TKiKX1srq1uKHlrJdO74PYndeihEmmG.html&si=IarUVVbdd5xhV3_Y
In 1910 Ivan Panin, a Russian/ American Harvard math genius and linguistic expert, proved the Bible mathematically. Watch - Math proves the Bible. Most recently a 30 year veteran cold case criminologist J. Warner Wallace proved the Bible forensically in his book, Person of Interest. His testimony would convince any jury of the veracity of the Bible. Some of the amazing things in the Bible include the prophecy of the fall of Tyre and the prophecy of Alexander the great. Bible firsts include knowing life being in the blood long before modern science, or the Bible knowing about mountains and currents in the oceans or how the earth hangs on nothing. You should know about the prophecies fulfilled by Jesus and the impossible odds of that happening. The Bible is a reliable collection of historical documents written down by eye witnesses during the lifetime of other eye witnesses. They report to us supernatural events that took place in fulfillment of specific prophecies and claim that the writings are divine rather than human in origin. The Bible has also been proven archaeologically, historically and linguistically.
2 Peter 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
It also predates the Quran by six hundred years.
Watch - The life of Mohammed (According to Islamic sources)
I don’t see much difference in the meat of the information. I see some different details. The gospels were never said to be exact copies.
We can all write a story about the same person and it will be the same but different
Yeah but people say the bible is the word of God? And they say that God is perfect, so why did he compel people to write a book full of contradictions? Doesn't add up at all
Churches must pay taxes